Get transaction details

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds that attachments are included, which is useful behavioral context, but it does not disclose any other traits such as permission needs, error behavior, or response richness beyond what the output schema provides.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately names the resource and the main value-add (attachments).

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only getter with a full input schema, an output schema, and readOnlyHint, the description is nearly complete. It could optionally mention that the output schema defines the returned fields, but no critical calling information is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and all three required UID parameters are documented directly in the schema. The description does not add format, default, or constraint details beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: get details of a specific feed item (transaction). It also clarifies that attachments are included, which distinguishes this detail-fetch from list operations like transactions_list and from sibling update/attachment tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage by saying it gets details of a specific feed item, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus transactions_list or feed_item_attachment_download. The context is inferable but not spelled out.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.